EXCLUSIVE / Europe has little to gain from trying to decarbonise the unwieldy shipping sector with liquefied natural gas (LNG), according to a new study that looks into how the EU could cut emissions over the next three decades.

Research by consultants UMAS revealed on Monday (25 June) that pouring billions of dollars into LNG-refuelling capacity for maritime and inland shipping would only yield emission reductions ranging from 6% to 10%.

The study highlighted how half a billion dollars has already been used by the EU to beef up infrastructure under tools like the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and that no notable greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) have been logged as a result.

Shipping accounted for about 3% of global emissions in 2012 and, on its current trajectory, will contribute between 6% and 14% by 2050 due to increased growth. Eighty percent of global trade is already transported by water.

EU commitments to the UN’s Paris Agreement mean the bloc is targeting 40% GHG reductions by 2030 and a net-zero emissions strategy for mid-century is likely to be released by the end of the year.

The EU’s top energy and climate official revealed on Wednesday (20 June) that the bloc is now set to increase its emissions reduction pledge from 40% by 2030 to 45%, after EU negotiators sealed agreements on three clean energy laws in the past fortnight.

But the IMO commitment is non-binding and a final plan is not expected until 2023, causing uncertainty about where investment should be directed. If the IMO revises its ambition up to a net-zero strategy, LNG assets could end up stranded, according to the study.

NGO group Transport & Environment, which commissioned the report, said the EU should “instead back future-proof technologies that would deliver the much greater emissions reductions that will be needed, including port-side charging and liquid hydrogen infrastructure”.

EU legislation dating from 2014 on alternative fuels lays out a number of options across various sectors but its insistence on LNG refuelling and bunkering facilities has now been called into question by T&E. The group urged the Commission to revise the “faulty” directive.

Italy’s picturesque Lake Como has become Europe’s first ‘electric destination’ after efforts to install a far-reaching electric-charging network were finally realised.

UMAS’s modelling showed that under a ‘high gas’ scenario, where LNG prices are low and alternative fuels like hydrogen are unavailable, the EU would be hit with a $22bn bill up to 2050 and GHG reductions would only fall within a 6%-10% bracket.

While increased LNG uptake could help the sector hit the IMO’s 2020 cap on sulphur emissions, according to UMAS researcher Domagoj Baresic, the fuel’s use in “shipping’s transition to a low carbon future can only be transient”.

Other fuel options include biofuels, electrification and hydrogen. Battery-powered ocean-going freighters are currently not feasible due to cost and component weight, so smaller vessels are the limit, while biofuels face their own set of cost and standards-based challenges.

Hydrogen Europe, a Brussels-based industry group, told EURACTIV that “hydrogen in the maritime sector is today already a reality as many ferry owners are choosing it to reduce their emissions”. Challenges like fuel efficiency and infrastructure still persist though.

Hydrogen prices are set to fall dramatically if enough surplus solar and wind energy can be utilised in the gas’s production, according to a new study which says hydrogen could even become cheaper than natural gas.

Meddlesome methane

Although LNG is easy to transport, one of its main downsides is its high methane content, whose climate-affecting potential is significantly greater than that of carbon dioxide.

The study explained that the phenomenon of ‘methane slipping’, when unburnt LNG escapes through a ship’s exhaust into the atmosphere, could actually help wipe out any emission reduction gains over diesel depending on the scenario.

The issue of fugitive methane is a serious consideration for energy companies and pipeline owners, as it entails sometimes significant losses in both deliverable capacity and income.

Last week, a landmark study by the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) claimed that methane leakage in the United States is 60% higher than previously estimated by the country’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

EDF chief scientist Steve Hamburg warned that if more than 2.7% of gas production leaks from the US network then the GHG impact is more significant than burning coal for power. The study drew on a decade of work to estimate that leakages totalled 2.3%.

Oil majors like Exxon and BP already intend to address the problem by rolling out advanced technology like infrared detection equipment. The International Energy Agency estimates that between 40% and 50% of current methane emissions could be cut at no net cost.

Plans to expand aquatic farming could have a serious knock-on effect on climate change, climate experts have warned after new research revealed that underwater shellfish farts produce 10% of the global-warming gases released by the Baltic Sea.

Advertisement

Comments

Those consultants want us to choke. We have bigger problems with shipping than just airborne carbon. Shipping is burning the filthiest fuels producing the worst smogs the planet knows. LNG will do away with those toxic clouds. And through bio-LNG, it also offers a longer-term prospect for lower greenhouse gases as well. What solutions are those consultants proposing – solutions that are technologically mature and economically sound?

There is an ample opportunity to make LBM – or Liquefied Bio-Methane (the recognised organic equivalent for LNG) as an option here. It is possible to meet the needs of over half of all shipping fuel replacements as Liquefied Bio-Methane for LNG in Europe very easily. This is not rocket science b ut traditional chemistry.

The potential within the EU is being rapidly developed.

In the Netherlands we are showing that there are two projects already close to start which will produce over 60,000 tonnes per year of Liquefied Bio-Methane with outputs delivering from 2019. In the UK two major facilities producing over 80,000 tonnes of Liquefied Bio-Methane are to start design and construction in 2018/2019 delivering this within the time frame to 2022 at full output. Further programmes in the EU – from the Mediterranean through to SE Europe are also scheduled to be in operation by the same group by 2023 with five to 8 additional facilities programmed which will collectively produce a further 200,000 – 300,000 tonnes per year.

Three of these will be using plastics thrown away from the Municipal Solid Waste and that will cure the throwing away of these plastics in Society. These are currently under control of the company in the UK/Wirrall and are using controlled and simple technology.